Inter-Correlations

The first objective was to determine if relationships between the constructs or variables in this study exist and, more specifically, how these relationships relate to the original hypotheses. Correlation is the measure of the size and direction of the linear relationship between two variables, whereas squared correlation is the measure of the strength of association between variables (Tabachnick & Fidell, 1996). Correlation however, does not indicate causality; rather regression is used to predict one variable from another. Pearson’s product-moment correlation coefficient, r, has been used to establish the nature of the various relationships between the variables. According to

Tabachnick and Fidell (1996) this statistic is the most frequently used measure of association and the basis of many multivariate calculations.

Prior to the calculation of the Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients, preliminary analyses were performed to ensure there were no violations of the assumptions underlying multivariate statistical analysis, specifically, normality, linearity and homoscedasticity as discussed in section 4.2.1.

The inter-correlations between each predictor and each criterion (general soldiering training proficiency and core technical training proficiency) follow as relating to the hypotheses set in section 3.3, beginning with the measures of general cognitive ability (g) followed by training motivation and openness to experience. The intercorrelations are shown in table 4.14.

4.6.1.1. The Relationship between Verbal Intelligence and General Soldiering Training Proficiency

The relationship between a trainee’s verbal intelligence (as measured by three general cognitive ability tests) and general soldiering training proficiency (as measured by obtaining an average score for theoretical assessments covering a number of modules) was investigated using Pearson’s product-moment correlation coefficient. From the correlation matrix (table 4.14) it can be seen that a moderate, positive and significant relationship exists between these two variables r = .510, p (one-tailed) < .01, confirming hypothesis one.

The implication of this finding is that an increase in trainees’ level of verbal intelligence would be related to an increase in their performance on theoretical assessments. This finding is consistent with the extensive literature on the relationship between general cognitive ability and training performance, specifically that the acquisition of knowledge and skills depends on learning and that since learning depends on individual differences in cognitive ability, general cognitive ability should predict success in training (Ree et al., 1994; Schmidt & Hunter, 1998).

4.6.1.2. The Relationship between Verbal Intelligence and Core Technical Training Proficiency

The analysis of the relationship between verbal intelligence and a trainee’s core technical training proficiency (as measured by obtaining an average of the scores on theoretical assessments covering a number of modules) revealed a positive, yet insignificant relationship between these two variables r = .059, p (one-tailed) > .05 (table 4.14). Therefore hypothesis two, stating that a significant positive relationship exists between verbal intelligence and core technical training proficiency, could not be corroborated since there was insufficient evidence to reject H02. This insignificant correlation contradicts previous research findings (Anderson et al., 2001; Colquitt et al., 2000; Hunter, 1986;

Hunter & Burke, 1994; Ree et al., 2001) and evidence in this study, where it was found that verbal intelligence was related to general soldiering training proficiency (see paragraph 4.6.1.1). It would be expected that verbal intelligence would be related to performance on both training programs, specifically in theoretical assessments, regardless of course content.

4.6.1.3. The Relationship between Visual-Spatial Intelligence and General Soldiering Training Proficiency

The correlation matrix (table 4.14) indicates that there is a moderate, positive and significant correlation between visual-spatial reasoning (as measured by three general cognitive ability tests) and general soldiering training proficiency, r = .325, p (one tailed) < .01, with high levels of visual-spatial reasoning associated with high levels of performance in general soldiering training assessments. H03is therefore rejected in favour of Ha4

,

4.6.1.4. The Relationship between Visual-Spatial Intelligence and Core Technical Training Proficiency

Hypothesis four stating that a significantly positive relationship exists between a trainee’s visual-spatial intelligence and core technical training proficiency was confirmed through the analyses as there is a weak yet significant correlation, r = .162, p (one-tailed) < .05 as indicated in table 4.14.

4.6.1.5. The Relationship between Hand-Eye Coordination and General Soldiering Training Proficiency

The relationship between these two variables was found to be insignificant, r = .093, p (one-tailed) >

.05 as shown in table 4.14, Ha5 is thus rejected.

4.6.1.6. The Relationship between Hand-eye Coordination and Core Technical Training Proficiency

There is insufficient evidence to support hypothesis six; a negative and insignificant relationship exists between hand-eye coordination and core technical training proficiency r = -.096, p (one-tailed)

> .05 (table 4.14). The same results were found for general soldiering training proficiency and may in part be explained by the logic that hand-eye coordination may be unrelated to theoretical nature of the training criterion measures in this training program.

4.6.1.7. The Relationship between Verbal Intelligence, Visual-Spatial Intelligence, Hand-Eye Coordination and Training Motivation

There is insufficient evidence to reject H07, H08 and H09, since these hypotheses proposed a positive relationship between the measures of intelligence and training motivation (as measured by the VIEMS). Findings from the correlation analysis of both dependent variables indicated that there is a negative relationship between motivation and intelligence. From table 4.14 it is shown that verbal intelligence and motivation r = -.138, p (one-tailed) > .05, visual-spatial reasoning and motivation r = -.050, p tailed) > .05 as well as hand-eye coordination and motivation r = -.156, p (one-tailed) > .05 are negatively related and therefore the three hypotheses are rejected.

4.6.1.8. The Relationship between Training Motivation and General Soldiering Training Proficiency

The correlation matrix as reported in table 4.14 indicates that the relationship between these two variables is negative (r = -.066, p (one-tailed) > .05) and not statistically significant, thus H010 could not be rejected.

4.6.1.9. The Relationship between Training Motivation and Core Technical Training Proficiency

From the results of the analyses as presented in table 4.14, it can be seen that there is a positive and significant moderate relationship between training motivation and core technical training proficiency (r = .246, p (one-tailed) < .01), with high levels of motivation associated with increased performance in core tasks. H011is therefore rejected in favour of Ha11. This finding is consistent with that found by Colquitt et al. (2000) showing that there is a relationship between motivation and general cognitive ability.

4.6.1.10. The Relationship between Openness to Experience and General Soldiering Training Proficiency

The relationship between openness to experience (as measured by the TIPI) and general soldiering training proficiency was found to be positive yet insignificant, r =.107, p (one-tailed) > .05. H12

could therefore not be rejected; results are shown in table 4.14.

4.6.1.11. The Relationship between Openness to Experience and Core Technical Training Proficiency

Hypothesis 13 stating that there is a significantly positive relationship between openness to experience and core technical training proficiency could not be confirmed (r = -.137, p (one-tailed) >

.05) (table 4.14), suggesting that higher levels of openness to experience are associated with decreased performance levels in core technical theoretical assessments. This finding may in part be explained by the fact that theoretical assessments may not be perceived as tasks requiring an open mind, rather with more practical tasks trainees are given an opportunity to explore. The findings regarding Hypothesis H012 and H013 seem to contradict previous research findings linking openness to experience to motivation (Pike et al., 2002).

4.6.1.12. The Relationship between Openness to Experience and Training Motivation

Findings indicate that while there is a positive relationship between openness to experience and training motivation, the relationship is not significant r = .089, p (one-tailed) > .05 (table 4.14).

4.6.1.13. Additional Correlations Indicated by the Data Analysis

During the data analysis, a number of correlations between the predictor measures were found and are shown in table 4.14. A significant positive and moderate correlation was found between verbal intelligence and visual-spatial reasoning r = .493, p (one-tailed) < .01 and between verbal intelligence and hand-eye coordination r = .220, p (one-tailed) <.05 for both criteria. These findings would be expected given the underlying common factor of all three measures which is g (Anderson et al., 2001;

Ree et al., 1994; Schmidt & Hunter, 1998).